Personal interpretation of Scripture and Authority of Church

[GottaGo12345678]

I also suspect GottaGo and I agree on the literal and symbolic aspects of the bread and the wine.

As stated earlier, it is similar to Baptism, “… an outward and visible sign of an inward and invisible grace…”

The Lords supper is designed for Christians to refect upon themselves in their ongoing relationship to Him and to others and to remember and be very thankful for the work that was. completed on the cross and the forgiveness it bestows on us.

Anytime Christians are gathered in His name He is present; yet invisible. The comunnion brings us all together in one mind; that of Christ.

Just to clarify for our Catholic friends; we do not believe we are eating the Lord; that would be contrary to His own commands concerning the eating of flesh.

 

[twb1621]

Oh, I took a partial quote, “No where in Scripture does it say the Church Jesus founded would end.” from the end of the links you provided, and commented.

But now I understand why you didn’t understand. You want me take each verse, one at a time, and explain/defend every religion that disagrees with the Catholic Church!!!

May I ask why you think I would waste time defending every belief that may exist - even when I’m certain to disagree with them?

I did not ask you to provide the interpretations of each belief system. I asked for your interpretations of the verses and your opinion regarding the quote of “one faith…”.

“so would you please respond how you reconcile the fact that it is but one faith, one set of teachings and beliefs but so many “Christian Faiths” have different beliefs all believing they are the right one? This is in direct contradiction to many verses within scripture.”

If you would like me to defend my own faith, I’ll be happy to oblige, but I cannot speak for others - I’m not a mind reader, afterall.

What I asked you for was YOUR interpretation of the verses I presented so that I may better understand how you justify your position against the legitimacy of the Catholic faith. You can’t defend your faith if you can’t credibly refute the Catholic Faith as the the Faith founded by Jesus and supported by these verses.It took four posts asking you for a response to these scripture verses only asking for your interpretation. A person who denies the legitimacy of the Catholic Faith should be able to credibly support their accusations but when it comes down to acknowledging that scripture supports the establishment, lineage and authenticity of the Catholic Faith there is only the choice of accepting scripture in its entirety as the inspired word of God or not accepting it. There is no middle ground. It is or it isn’t. Denying any part of scripture is denying it to be the inspired word of God. Scripture does not conflict with itself. Jesus is the truth and there can only be one truth.

 

[GottaGo12345678]

Then please tell us who among the sola scripturists is correct about Baptism. Lutherans and others like Methodists and Anglicans believe water Baptism saves and is a sacrament that should be given to infants. Other sola scripturists like Baptists say water baptism does not save but is only an ordinance not a sacrament and is reserved for adults only. Both will quote the very same scriptures. Now since salvation is the issue then I think it is reasonable to say that is an important doctrine. So why are sola scripturists so diametrically opposed doctrinally on baptism?

I never met a Chistian that believes that water saves, but I know many who believe God saves. There are some who are mistaken in believing that water removes original sin and others that believe water baptism is necessary as part of salvation, but this would contradict the Word and nature of God; the nature because He saves in the NT the same as the OT; He does not change. It is always by faith in God.

 

[GottaGo12345678]

What I asked you for was YOUR interpretation of the verses I presented so that I may better understand how you justify your position against the legitimacy of the Catholic faith. You can’t defend your faith if you can’t credibly refute the Catholic Faith as the the Faith founded by Jesus and supported by these verses. It took four posts asking you for a response to these scripture verses only asking for your interpretation. A person who denies the legitimacy of the Catholic Faith should be able to credibly support their accusations but when it comes down to acknowledging that scripture supports the establishment, lineage and authenticity of the Catholic Faith there is only the choice of accepting scripture in its entirety as the inspired word of God or not accepting it. There is no middle ground. It is or it isn’t. Denying any part of scripture is denying it to be the inspired word of God. Scripture does not conflict with itself. Jesus is the truth and there can only be one truth.

How do you defend against something that is not in Scripture; Catholic faith? Doesn’t the Catholic faith teach that only the Catholic Church is the “infallible” interpreter of Scripture?

 

[inkaneer]

Gal 3:22 — But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

Galatians 3: makes clear God’s plan was to ensure everyone was concluded under sin - even those who had not committed personal sinned - like an infant.

So that they could be saved thru the cross. Why do you deny Mary this gift?

If Mary was born without the curse of original she didn’t need the cross of Christ.

The Bible teaches us that Jesus was the only one who could sacrifice himself to pay for our sins, because Jesus is the only one who is perfect - born without sin and never sinned his entire life.

So, Mary could not be perfect - born without sin and never sinned his entire life - because that would mean Jesus was not the only one who could redeem mankind.

These false doctrine about Mary are spawn from human rationalization, for they contradict the Holy Word of God.

REPLY: Well all of this has been explained before but I suppose when someone’s mind has sprung like a steel trap nothing will open it to reason. But for what it is worth, understand that Mary is saved by the cross. Her salvation is in Jesus just as yours and mine are. What you don’t understand is that God, because he is Omnipotent, is more powerful than sin and can, by a miracle that we call the Immaculate Conception, provide a fitting mother for his only begotten son. So Mary’s salvation is dependant on Jesus just as yours is but Mary was saved before Calvary while you are saved after. The angel addressed Mary as full of grace. And let’s not water it down by saying she was “highly favored” This is not a horse race we are betting on. She was filled with grace before the age of grace even began. You can’t explain how that could be so you water it down by saying she was merely highly favored. Yeah, Mary was only highly favored, not full of grace and the Mona Lisa is only a mere painting, not a masterpiece. Same, same

 

[GottaGo12345678]

REPLY: Well all of this has been explained before but I suppose when someone’s mind has sprung like a steel trap nothing will open it to reason. But for what it is worth, understand that Mary is saved by the cross. Her salvation is in Jesus just as yours and mine are. What you don’t understand is that God, because he is Omnipotent, is more powerful than sin and can, by a miracle that we call the Immaculate Conception, provide a fitting mother for his only begotten son. So Mary’s salvation is dependant on Jesus just as yours is but Mary was saved before Calvary while you are saved after. The angel addressed Mary as full of grace. And let’s not water it down by saying she was “highly favored” This is not a horse race we are betting on. She was filled with grace before the age of grace even began. You can’t explain how that could be so you water it down by saying she was merely highly favored. Yeah, Mary was only highly favored, not full of grace and the Mona Lisa is only a mere painting, not a masterpiece. Same, same

Opening a Sriptural feast on the Catholic Mary? I wouldn’t go down that path; you have the Bible and the evolving history of your Church against you.

That topic should be the eye opener for you, but you seem to believe you see clearly.

 

[twb1621]

How do you defend against something that is not in Scripture; Catholic faith? Doesn’t the Catholic faith teach that only the Catholic Church is the “infallible” interpreter of Scripture?

Oh, I see. The Church Christ founded through the apostles which continued through their successors spread to various geographic areas including Antioch which is where the faithful eventually became known as Christians. A short time later the ministry of the Church became known as Catholic meaning “universal” to keep it brief, referring to her as the Catholic Church or Faith continued through the first few hundred years and it retained the identity as the Catholic Church through to today. Its all in recorded history. There are many things not in scripture but too many people read scripture as dead writings as though it is instructions for assembling a bicycle. They are living and that life is guided by the Holy Spirit through the Faith Jesus established and assigned the Spirit to guide until His return. He declared He would be with His church always.

If you want to discuss the infallibility issue we can do that in another thread. If you are going to respond to the questions I have been asking Ginger to respond to, I am presenting you with a copy of the original post as it is fitting to this thread. Perhaps you can credibly explain denying the authenticity of the Catholic Faith.

Recorded history proves the origin and lineage of the Catholic Church from the establishment laid by Jesus through His apostles and their successors. The Apostles continued the growth and establishment of the Church through the assignment of their successors and the formation of the hierarchy. These are the very same Faithful followers who came to be known as “Christians” in Antioch and a short time later recognized as the “universal” or “Catholic Church”.

Through the Gospel Jesus proclaims the Church He founded will never fall but He also clearly warned there would be corrupt men (wolves) who would violate her and deceive others. That those corrupt would cause many to follow the wrong path by distorting His word not only from outside His Church but from within at times. All of these prophesy we have seen including the corruption outside as well as those who deceived with His word from within the Church such as Martin Luther. There are many verses in Gospel that point all these violations against His Church out. It is also proclaimed that the Church WILL be of one God and One Faith and nowhere in scripture does it say derivatives with there own beliefs will be acceptable. It is specific to only one Faith and one God. The following verses are some of those attesting to these prophecies and proclamations;

**Jesus said, **
**Mat. Ch16; 15-19 “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Jesus answered, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” **

Luke CH22; 31 “And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you all as wheat: 32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.”

Jesus said:
“…I am the good shepherd, and I know mine and mine know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I will lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd.” (Jn 10:14-16)

Matthew CH24; 4 “And Jesus answering, said to them: Take heed that no man seduce you: 5 For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ: and they will seduce many. 6 And you shall hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that ye be not troubled. For these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there shall be pestilences, and famines, and earthquakes in places: 8 Now all these are the beginnings of sorrows. 9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall put you to death: and you shall be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. 10 And then shall many be scandalized: and shall betray one another: and shall hate one another. 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many. 12 And because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold. 13 But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved.”

Acts Ch20; 28 “Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. 29 I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.”

Ephesians CH4; 1 “I therefore, a prisoner in the Lord, beseech you that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called, 2 With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in charity. 3 Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 One body (the Church) and one Spirit (Holy Spirit); as you are called in one hope of your calling. 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism.”

continued…

 

[twb1621]

continued from previous post…

1 Corinthians CH12; “12 For as the body is one, and hath many members; and all the members of the body, whereas they are many, yet are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For in one Spirit (The Holy Spirit) were we all baptized into one body (Church), whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free; and in one Spirit we have all been made to drink. 14 For the body also is not one member, but many (the established church including the faithful). 15 If the foot should say, because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 16 And if the ear should say, because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 17 If the whole body were the eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling? 18 But now God hath set the members every one of them in the body as it hath pleased him. 19 And if they all were one member, where would be the body? 20 But now there are many members indeed, yet one body. **
**21 And the eye cannot say to the hand: I need not thy help; nor again the head to the feet: I have no need of you. 22 Yea, much more those that seem to be the more feeble members of the body, are more necessary. 23 And such as we think to be the less honourable members of the body, about these we put more abundant honour; and those that are our uncomely parts, have more abundant comeliness. 24 But our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, giving to that which wanted the more abundant honour, 25 That there might be no schism in the body; but the members might be mutually careful one for another. **
26 If (one) part suffers, all the parts suffer with it; if one part is honored, all the parts share its joy. 27 Now you are Christ’s body, and individually parts of it. 28 Some people God has designated in the church to be, first, apostles; second, prophets; third, teachers; then, mighty deeds; then, gifts of healing, assistance, administration, and varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work mighty deeds? 30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 31 Strive eagerly for the greatest spiritual gifts. But I shall show you a still more excellent way. ”
Colossians CH1; 18 “And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he may hold the primacy: 19 Because in him, it hath well pleased the Father, that all fullness should dwell; 20 And through him to reconcile all things unto himself, making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in heaven. **
21 And you, whereas you were some time alienated and enemies in mind in evil works: 22 Yet now he hath reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unspotted, and blameless before him: 23 If so ye continue in the faith, grounded and settled, and immoveable from the hope of the gospel which you have heard, which is preached in all the creation that is under heaven, whereof I Paul am made a minister. 24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church.”

No where in Scripture does it say the Church Jesus founded would end, become corrupt and fail or be reestablished at any time or by any man before His return. On the contrary. It proclaims everything but these things to occur. If in fact the Catholic Church was not the true Church as some other “Christian” faiths were led to believe, one would have to know which Faith was the True Faith. After all, there must be one (and only one) because the Bible testifies to it and to the fact it must be visible, obvious, and is of only “one God, one Faith, one body and one Baptism”… So which one has been established by Jesus through the Apostles and their successors and has maintained consistency since His crucifixion without interruption as Jesus proclaimed AND has all the Characteristics to identify it Biblically?

Only the Catholic Church.

No where in Scripture does it say the Church Jesus founded would end, become corrupt and fail or be reestablished at any time or by any man before His return. On the contrary. It proclaims everything but these things to occur. If in fact the Catholic Church was not the true Church as some other “Christian” faiths were led to believe, one would have to know which Faith was the True Faith. After all, there must be one (and only one) because the Bible testifies to it and to the fact it must be visible, obvious, and is of only “one God, one Faith, one body and one Baptism”… So which one has been established by Jesus through the Apostles and their successors and has maintained consistency since His crucifixion without interruption as Jesus proclaimed AND has all the Characteristics to identify it Biblically?

 

[LionHeart777]

There are some who are mistaken in believing that water removes original sin…

According to you, the teachings of the ECF’s are mistaken because they taught Baptismal Regeneration. Is it wise to trust your private interpretation above the “unanimous consent” of the Fathers? It is not hard to see who holds the novelty interpretation IMO. This goes right back to the title of the thread; it shows IMO how Tradition helps one to come to an orthodox understanding of the Scriptures.

 

[GottaGo12345678]

continued from previous post…

1 Corinthians CH12; “12 For as the body is one, and hath many members; and all the members of the body, whereas they are many, yet are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For in one Spirit (The Holy Spirit) were we all baptized into one body (Church), whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free; and in one Spirit we have all been made to drink. 14 For the body also is not one member, but many (the established church including the faithful**). 15 If the foot should say, because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 16 And if the ear should say, because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 17 If the whole body were the eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling? 18 But now God hath set the members every one of them in the body as it hath pleased him. 19 And if they all were one member, where would be the body? 20 But now there are many members indeed, yet one body.
21 And the eye cannot say to the hand: I need not thy help; nor again the head to the feet: I have no need of you. 22 Yea, much more those that seem to be the more feeble members of the body, are more necessary. 23 And such as we think to be the less honourable members of the body, about these we put more abundant honour; and those that are our uncomely parts, have more abundant comeliness. 24 But our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, giving to that which wanted the more abundant honour, 25 That there might be no schism in the body; but the members might be mutually careful one for another.
26 If (one) part suffers, all the parts suffer with it; if one part is honored, all the parts share its joy. 27 Now you are Christ’s body, and individually parts of it. 28 Some people God has designated in the church to be, first, apostles; second, prophets; third, teachers; then, mighty deeds; then, gifts of healing, assistance, administration, and varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work mighty deeds? 30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 31 Strive eagerly for the greatest spiritual gifts. But I shall show you a still more excellent way. ”
Colossians CH1; 18 “And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he may hold the primacy: 19 Because in him, it hath well pleased the Father, that all fullness should dwell; 20 And through him to reconcile all things unto himself, making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in heaven**.
21 And you, whereas you were some time alienated and enemies in mind in evil works: 22 Yet now he hath reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unspotted, and blameless before him: 23 If so ye continue in the faith, grounded and settled, and immoveable from the hope of the gospel which you have heard, which is preached in all the creation that is under heaven, whereof I Paul am made a minister. 24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church.”

No where in Scripture does it say the Church Jesus founded would end, become corrupt and fail or be reestablished at any time or by any man before His return. On the contrary. It proclaims everything but these things to occur. If in fact the Catholic Church was not the true Church as some other “Christian” faiths were led to believe, one would have to know which Faith was the True Faith. After all, there must be one (and only one) because the Bible testifies to it and to the fact it must be visible, obvious, and is of only “one God, one Faith, one body and one Baptism”… So which one has been established by Jesus through the Apostles and their successors and has maintained consistency since His crucifixion without interruption as Jesus proclaimed AND has all the Characteristics to identify it Biblically?

Only the Catholic Church.

No where in Scripture does it say the Church Jesus founded would end, become corrupt and fail or be reestablished at any time or by any man before His return. On the contrary. It proclaims everything but these things to occur. If in fact the Catholic Church was not the true Church as some other “Christian” faiths were led to believe, one would have to know which Faith was the True Faith. After all, there must be one (and only one) because the Bible testifies to it and to the fact it must be visible, obvious, and is of only “one God, one Faith, one body and one Baptism”… So which one has been established by Jesus through the Apostles and their successors and has maintained consistency since His crucifixion without interruption as Jesus proclaimed AND has all the Characteristics to identify it Biblically?

I see the error in your reasoning through Scripture, which I commend you for.

Perhaps answering this question(s) can help you to identify your major error. What is a tare and how can you tell the difference compared to the wheat? Hint: Physical visablility versus spiritual invisibility.

Again; I commend you for using Scripture to support your position; keep it up!

 

[GottaGo12345678]

According to you, all of the ECF’s are mistaken because they taught Baptismal Regeneration. Is it wise to trust your private interpretation above the unanimous consent of the Fathers? It is not hard to see who holds the novelty interpretation IMO. This goes right back to the title of the thread; it shows IMO how Tradition helps one to come to an orthodox understanding of the Scriptures.

Hello, how are you?

I seriously doubt the ecf’s taught water baptism saves because the Apostles did not and neither did God; else God has changed & ordained a new and different way He saves, which by His nature He cannot do.

I have a feeling you would say that circumcision in the OT saved. Perhaps I’m wrong on that.

 

[twb1621]

I see the error in your reasoning through Scripture, which I commend you for.

Perhaps answering this question(s) can help you to identify your major error. What is a tare and how can you tell the difference compared to the wheat? Hint: Physical visablility versus spiritual invisibility.

Again; I commend you for using Scripture to support your position; keep it up!

I noticed you didn’t refer to scripture… even the verses I asked your attention to. Another Unsubstantiated response to avoid responding to the questions.

 

[EdOsiecki]

if i were protestant, i could interpret that to mean you and your brother married each other

Hi Shoewindow 3000, thanks for your immature reply. My statement on post 1233 also states that we both had children. If so, according to your interpretation and understanding, we would be the first in humanity to have done so. I can now very well see and understand why you need your Magesterium’s help to interpret. Go for it big time! ED O.

 

[GottaGo12345678]

I noticed you didn’t refer to scripture… even the verses I asked your attention to. Another Unsubstantiated response to avoid responding to the questions.

In my Bible, it speaks of tares and wheat; doesn’t your Bible? You see I am leading you to discern for yourself and from Scriptural perspective. If you are not interested; that is okay with me.

If there is a specific question I avoided, thne bring it forth.

 

[estesbob]

Hi Shoewindow 3000, thanks for your immature reply. My statement on post 1233 also states that we both had children. If so, according to your interpretation and understanding, we would be the first in humanity to have done so. I can now very well see and understand why you need your Magesterium’s help to interpret. Go for it big time! ED O.

How would we know you didnt adopt your children?

 

[LionHeart777]

I seriously doubt the ecf’s taught water baptism saves because the Apostles did not and neither did God; else God has changed & ordained a new and different way He saves, which by His nature He cannot do.

I have a feeling you would say that circumcision in the OT saved. Perhaps I’m wrong on that.

Hello there too. I was in this thread earlier back but I don’t believe we’ve exchanged comments before. My name is Nick, nice to meet you.

Perhaps, you have some investigating into the writings of early Christians to do, as the ECF’s taught Baptismal Regeneration; whether or not that means “baptism [in and of itself] saves” I doubt it as I believe Catholic teaching is that one needs to be “properly disposed” to receive the grace of the Sacraments. In Baptism, I believe that this would include faith. To me, the teaching is also found in the writings of St. Peter who told us that, “…baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:” (biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%203:21&version=KJV) (9/ 06/ 09) Also see the Gospel of St. John chapter 3: “Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%203&version=KJV) (accessed 9/ 06/ 09)

The following are quotes from Protestant sources who disagree w/ the ECF’s and Catholics/Orthodox/ Lutherans, etc on the matter of Baptismal Regeneration. Nevertheless, they concede:

"’…As a matter of historical fact, there was a general consensus among the Fathers that baptism was the instrument of regeneration and washing away of sin.’ (justforcatholics.org/a116.htm) (accessed [8]/ 25/ 09)

‘…The doctrine of baptism is one of the few teachings within Roman Catholicism for which it can be said that there is a universal consent of the Fathers.’ (the-highway.com/sacramental_Webster.html) ([8]/ 25/ 09)"

I clipped this from another post of mine in another thread.

Will these quotes suffice or would you like a plethora of quotes from the ECF’s?

Personally, I don’t know how people were saved in the O.T. Although, I don’t believe it was by Circumcision as I believe St. Paul refutes that idea in Romans. Regarding your study of early Church writings; I highly recommend you see what those successors of the Apostles believed. I’ll tell you up front that my decision to leave Protestantism and my abandonment of Sola Scriptura was heavily influenced by the writings of the ECF’s. I abandoned many of my personal interpretations and as you see, I’m in the process of “swimming up the Tiber.”

Peace,

Nick

 

[EdOsiecki]

]

The Lords supper is designed for Christians to refect upon themselves in their ongoing relationship to Him and to others and to remember and be very thankful for the work that was. completed on the cross and the forgiveness it bestows on us.

Amen! and Amen! GottaGo 12345678, thank you for explaining it so wonderfully. Please allow me to remind, on the cross, which can’t be repeated over and over again. It’s history. We celebrate the cross, as the Jews celebrate their Exsodus passover. ED O.

 

[EdOsiecki]

]

how would we know you didnt adopt your children?

Hi estesbob, thanks for your reply. I thought that I had settled this matter on post 1280. Even if they were adopted children, do they disappear in an annulemt? With these type questions that you and Showindow 3000 ask, I’m more than ever now convinced that you both definitely need your Magesterium’s help to interpret. Go for it in a big way! —Doesn’t the Catholic church teach against incest? I very clearly state on post 1233 that my brother and I were both reared as Catholics. ED O.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Ginger, you keep on with the same unsupported statements.

What exactly is the ‘false’ SS interpretation of Catholics? How is it false?

Where is the documentation that this ‘doctrine’ did not exist until it was ‘invented’ by Catholics?

What exactly do Catholics ‘teach’ that is not TRUE about SS?

And is your SS the ‘same’ as in other Protestant denominations? Is it, in fact, the same SS that was taught in the 16th century? If so, you should be able to point to Luther’s teachings then and there should be absolutely no change. Luther taught that Mary was ever-virgin. Do YOU?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

The Lords supper is designed for Christians to refect upon themselves in their ongoing relationship to Him and to others and to remember and be very thankful for the work that was. completed on the cross and the forgiveness it bestows on us.

Funny, I can’t find this in Scripture at all. I find things like “This IS my Body. This IS my Blood.” And St. Paul speaking of ‘profaning’ the Eucharist by taking unworthily.

And for 1500 years Christians (yes, our Orthodox brethren, whom you so shamefully ignore believe this too) taught the Real Presence. It is the traditions of men who teach a ‘different gospel’.

I challenge all of my Protestant acquaintance who speak of the ‘symbolic’ Eucharist to go on over to the Eastern Religions and to question the Orthodox about THEIR belief about the Eucharist. The Real Presence is not ‘just’ a Catholic belief and so it isn’t ‘just’ the Catholic Christians whose beliefs you reject.